The proposal is backed by China, Russia, Brazil, India and other UN members, and would give the UN’s International Telecommunication Union (ITU) more control over the governance of the Internet.

It’s an unpopular idea with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in Congress, and officials with the Obama administration have also criticized it.

Larry Strickling, the head of the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration, said the measure would expose the Internet to “top-down regulation where it’s really the governments that are at the table, but the rest of the stakeholders aren’t.”

At a hearing earlier this month, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) also criticized the proposal. He said China and Russia are “not exactly bastions of Internet freedom.”

“Any place that bans certain terms from search should not be a leader in international Internet regulatory frameworks,” he said, adding that he will keep a close eye on the process.

I’m certainly not convinced that the US government is more supportive of free and open web access than the rest of the world combined. After all, we’re the ones who proposed legislation for an “Internet kill switch.” With the best of intentions, naturally. But it seems like the old adage of “destroying the village in order to save it.”

I suspect that most governments (the United States included) are distrustful of any sort of communications that can cross international borders unimpeded and unmonitored. People don’t become less human because they live on the other side of some border and speak a different language.

What problem is being solved by more regulation? Every nation has laws against criminal activity already. It is true that the US sets standards for the rest of the world. Similarly, 2,500 years ago, classical Greece set standards for philosophy and mathematics. What is it that Putin and his gang want to do that can’t be done now — except censorship, of course?

The issue is that China passes laws about how the Internet can be used in China… wheras the US Government passes laws about how the Internet can be used anywhere in the world, and expects US Internet companies to enforce them in, say, Italy or Australia because the is some infrastructure centralisation.

I accept that the underlying infrastructure of the Internet, back in the 1960s, was American… but that’s like saying that the World Wide Web is Swiss because that’s where the protocols were developed….

This is clearly another step towards world government. Why does the UN need to regulate United States internet, when we as a sovereign country can do this our selves. I hope our law makers do the right thing and veto any such proposals now and forever

Its is nonsense, The United Nations is up to no good, and don’t need that kind of additional ;power. Americans need to wise up and and put a stop to this right now! . Do we want an evil organization to dominate the whole world? We need to keep a “close eye” on the United Nations. If they should have control of the whole world, it would be a terrible disaster! It could cause a global war, and could possibly mean the end of life as we know it.
Hey everybody – wake u p!